ILNews

Shepard retiring as Indiana chief justice

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard announced Wednesday that he is stepping down from the bench in March 2012. Shepard, who joined the Indiana Supreme Court in 1985 and became chief justice in 1987, is the longest serving state court chief justice in the United States.

Shepard has authored nearly 900 opinions and 68 law review articles. He co-created the Indiana Conference for Legal Education Opportunity with Gov. Frank O'Bannon in 1997 to help minority and educationally and economically disadvantaged students succeed in law school. In 2007, Shepard was appointed by Gov. Mitch Daniels to co-chair the Indiana Commission on Local Government Reform with former Gov. Joe Kernan. Their report on how to streamline government became known as the "Kernan-Shepard Report."

Shepard has also served as adjunct professor at Yale Law School — where he received his law degree in 1972 — as well as at the Maurer School of Law in Bloomington and Robert H. McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis.

The Evansville native has been honored by his hometown — he is the inspiration for the Evansville-Vanderburgh School Corp.'s Randall T. Shepard Academy for Law and Social Justice, and the Evansville Bar Association recently restored and named the Randall T. Shepard Courtroom in the Old Vanderburgh Courthouse. Shepard is married and has one daughter.

The Indiana Judicial Nominating Commission, which is chaired by Shepard, will begin interviewing candidates in February. The governor will select the next justice.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Inquiring minds want to know
    Justice Shepard is quite young as far as judges go. I was before Richard Cudahay last month -- over 80. A setting federal judge in Kansas is over 100. Shepard is Bill and Hillary Clinton's age -- went to school with them, in fact. So what does he have planned for the rest of his life?
  • A Brilliant Jurist
    Chief Justice Shepard is a brilliant jurist. He has served the state of Indiana honorably and with dignity. He is thoughtful and fair. The Judicial Nominating Comission has a tough job ahead of it. I have practiced law in Indiana for 23 years. With all due respect to my fellow attorneys, I cannot think of a single judge or lawyer who can fill Shepard's shoes.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Indiana State Bar Association

    Indianapolis Bar Association

    Evansville Bar Association

    Allen County Bar Association

    Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

    facebook
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

    2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

    3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

    4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

    5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

    ADVERTISEMENT